If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The t wolves are a 500. When kevin love missed time this year they were stilk a 500 team which means his stats aren't affecting the wins and loses. Don't merge this into a twolves/kevin love discussion to get away from david lee... I don't really believe I'm arguing with someone who is saying that David lee, 1 time all star is better than amare, who didn't have 2 good months as a knick he's had a decade of dominance... Amare's worst year last year in the league. his number are in line with d. Lees career numbers. His team is better because stephen curry is healthy anf klay thompson is hooping. I don't I'm comparing stat to david lee. Smh....

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

You're the one who brought up Kevin Love.

A decade of dominance? I haven't watched a lot of him in his Suns days, but I do know he had an amazing PG on his team feeding him most of that time.

You're the one ignoring what I said. You stated straight up false information. Did you see Amar'e dribble the ball off his foot tonight? He may be rusty, but that's nothing new.

I'm pulling for STAT and hope he comes back to how he was early on with the Knicks when he did have a bigger impact than Lee, but stop denying David Lee is getting things done and Bogut hasn't even played.

Yes, the Timberwolves were winning without Love, they have a lot of good players and a good coach. This still doesn't explain how his stats are empty.

let's not forget all the Lee doubters chalking up his double-double stats to Antoni's SSOL.
not only does Lee currently have virtually identical numbers to his best season with the Knicks,
but he's become an integral part of the Mark Jackson GS scheme, working incredibly well
with Steph Curry and crew.
he's not injury-prone like STAT has turned out to be, his short-range shot is better than STAT's,
his rebounding is better, and he's LEADING his team to a much better record year after year.

perhaps STAT is a better player overall, when and if he's healthy, but for the money being paid both players, I prefer David Lee.

That does explain how his stats are empty. You just refrain from accepting it. They're 500 with him or without him. Thats clearly an indication of empty stats. As far as you're statements I'm pretty sure david lee dribbled the ball off his foot before. Actually Jason kidd lost a playoff game against the heat dribbling the ball off his foot in the waning seconds. So does that mean he can't handle the ball? Hell no. U say u didn't watch him in phoenix and i respect that admittance when most people would just act like they did for the sake of winning an arguement. But if u didn't watch him in phoenix then u can't give the credit to the point guard because I've been a stat fan since pheonix and he was no joke and nash benefited him just as much as he benifited nash. All I'm sayin is david lee isn't doing anything that he hasn't done before. But that doesn't mean the perception of him as a player should move up a tier or 2.

That does explain how his stats are empty. You just refrain from accepting it. They're 500 with him or without him. Thats clearly an indication of empty stats. As far as you're statements I'm pretty sure david lee dribbled the ball off his foot before. Actually Jason kidd lost a playoff game against the heat dribbling the ball off his foot in the waning seconds. So does that mean he can't handle the ball? Hell no. U say u didn't watch him in phoenix and i respect that admittance when most people would just act like they did for the sake of winning an arguement. But if u didn't watch him in phoenix then u can't give the credit to the point guard because I've been a stat fan since pheonix and he was no joke and nash benefited him just as much as he benifited nash. All I'm sayin is david lee isn't doing anything that he hasn't done before. But that doesn't mean the perception of him as a player should move up a tier or 2.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

Whether or not STAT was awesome on his own or not on the Suns doesn't mean he's the same player.

I said Amar'e when healthy and determined has had a bigger impact than David Lee, but David is usually healthy and is consistent, and the Warriors are having a very good season.

Amar'e has dribbled it off his foot a LOT. Him being fancy is not part of his game yet he's done it many times. His decision making was bad a lot of the time.

As far as Love and their record with and without him goes, that's not clearly an indication of empty stats. Explain the negatives in his game that would make this true. How many players can rebound like him?

So you would rather have someone who's stats don't determine wins and losses as opposed to an individual who can have a major impact on wins and losses. Maybe in golden state thats acceptable but not with a contending team. Kevin loss not affecting wins and losses with his game imo is the definition of empty stats. You should get better when your star returns not stay the same. That has nothing to do with what i believe his limitations are as a player, in which i don't think there aren't many. Rondo is not an empty stat player, when he doesn't play the celtics are putrid on both sides of the ball. Impact players vs consistency is i guess the discussion here. When has a contending team ever traded away the impact player for the more consistent but just blends in the game-we cant go to you in crunch time because u can't dominate player. 2 trades that pop up immediately are the sixers swapping theo ratliff for deke and the celtics swapping al jefferson for kg. Al Jefferson was a monster but he isn't kg as far as determining wins and losses with his contributions on the court. I guess david lee at 3rd or 4th option is good for him to just blend in and not try to do to much like stat does alot. But he is clearly our second best player and our second best player should be better then the warriors 3rd best player because we are deeper and better then them correct?

So you would rather have someone who's stats don't determine wins and losses as opposed to an individual who can have a major impact on wins and losses. Maybe in golden state thats acceptable but not with a contending team. Kevin loss not affecting wins and losses with his game imo is the definition of empty stats. You should get better when your star returns not stay the same. That has nothing to do with what i believe his limitations are as a player, in which i don't think there aren't many. Rondo is not an empty stat player, when he doesn't play the celtics are putrid on both sides of the ball. Impact players vs consistency is i guess the discussion here. When has a contending team ever traded away the impact player for the more consistent but just blends in the game-we cant go to you in crunch time because u can't dominate player. 2 trades that pop up immediately are the sixers swapping theo ratliff for deke and the celtics swapping al jefferson for kg. Al Jefferson was a monster but he isn't kg as far as determining wins and losses with his contributions on the court. I guess david lee at 3rd or 4th option is good for him to just blend in and not try to do to much like stat does alot. But he is clearly our second best player and our second best player should be better then the warriors 3rd best player because we are deeper and better then them correct?

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

The Warriors are MUCH better than the previous two years in which David Lee was there. It's very reasonable to believe David Lee is having an impact. Monta Ellis isn't even there anymore.

On this Knicks team I'd have more faith in David Lee as a player. Stoudemire has to prove he can be that BIG impact player he once was. I haven't denied his impact when he was on. It's been about two years since we saw that Stoudemire consistently.

I understand you're meaning of empty stats player, impact player, we both agree on the meaning of it. I just don't understand why you feel that way about David Lee, especially with the big turn around the team has gone, and actually, Curry got injured last season after they started well.

I don't base players off of stats, but I've read that the Celtics defense is better without him, at least in previous seasons. The Celtics aren't even in the top 8 in the East. He's not the incredible player people say he is to me. Obviously it's a team game and KG and Pierce aren't what they used to be, and I haven't watched Rondo much this season, but Rondo never impressed me enough to be an All-Star in my eyes, let alone superstar. He'd had some big games, but not enough to me.

Far far away from the orgy that consist of clyde, 8's, rady, smokes and rono

Posts

11,260

Rep Power

0

Originally Posted by RunningJumper

The Warriors are MUCH better than the previous two years in which David Lee was there. It's very reasonable to believe David Lee is having an impact. Monta Ellis isn't even there anymore.

On this Knicks team I'd have more faith in David Lee as a player. Stoudemire has to prove he can be that BIG impact player he once was. I haven't denied his impact when he was on. It's been about two years since we saw that Stoudemire consistently.

I understand you're meaning of empty stats player, impact player, we both agree on the meaning of it. I just don't understand why you feel that way about David Lee, especially with the big turn around the team has gone, and actually, Curry got injured last season after they started well.

I don't base players off of stats, but I've read that the Celtics defense is better without him, at least in previous seasons. The Celtics aren't even in the top 8 in the East. He's not the incredible player people say he is to me. Obviously it's a team game and KG and Pierce aren't what they used to be, and I haven't watched Rondo much this season, but Rondo never impressed me enough to be an All-Star in my eyes, let alone superstar. He'd had some big games, but not enough to me.

I can't agree anymore, Rondo is really overrated; what if he started his career with Sacramento?

The Warriors are MUCH better than the previous two years in which David Lee was there. It's very reasonable to believe David Lee is having an impact. Monta Ellis isn't even there anymore.

On this Knicks team I'd have more faith in David Lee as a player. Stoudemire has to prove he can be that BIG impact player he once was. I haven't denied his impact when he was on. It's been about two years since we saw that Stoudemire consistently.

I understand you're meaning of empty stats player, impact player, we both agree on the meaning of it. I just don't understand why you feel that way about David Lee, especially with the big turn around the team has gone, and actually, Curry got injured last season after they started well.

I don't base players off of stats, but I've read that the Celtics defense is better without him, at least in previous seasons. The Celtics aren't even in the top 8 in the East. He's not the incredible player people say he is to me. Obviously it's a team game and KG and Pierce aren't what they used to be, and I haven't watched Rondo much this season, but Rondo never impressed me enough to be an All-Star in my eyes, let alone superstar. He'd had some big games, but not enough to me.

I also think that david lee would be better for this team, the reason is because his responsibilities wouldn't be anything but to fit in. Now amares responsibility on our team is to be a superstar, to form our superstar tandem to take down the heat. Well he isn't gonna be a superstar but he still can be an all star and david lee at best is a glorified role player. He's been there a few years now but now all of a sudden there good and it's because of him? I tend to think its the growth of there guard play and mark jackson, d lee is super consistent but don't believe the hype and boast him better then amare. If we swapped stat would be there best player and d lee would be 3rd at best over here. But he does fit better over here then stat. However if i rank the players stat still comes before him.

Where did u read that at about rondo? Twitter? Newspaper? Any other media outlet? Those guys aren't basketball experts so most of them really dont know, they just have degrees in journalism which in favor gives them a platform to voice what they THINK but what they think really is just that and not anymore valid then what we think.

Where did u read that at about rondo? Twitter? Newspaper? Any other media outlet? Those guys aren't basketball experts so most of them really dont know, they just have degrees in journalism which in favor gives them a platform to voice what they THINK but what they think really is just that and not anymore valid then what we think.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

It's stats I read more than once not that long ago. As I said, I'm not basing my opinion off that, just something to consider.